Tea Party Nation's Judson Phillips told members in an email today that their movement cannot avoid the issue of same-sex marriage, as it threatens to destroy the family, replace freedom with anarchy and "turn marriage into a freak show involving 3 men, 5 women, 2 dogs and a Bengal tiger."

Polygamy is still separately illegal and has mainly Mormon right-wingers (and few hippie commune crappers) pushing to get it legalized. Meanwhile, the dogs and Bengal tiger can't consent. False slippery slope is false.

PC LOAD LETTER:Polygamy is still separately illegal and has mainly Mormon right-wingers (and few hippie commune crappers) pushing to get it legalized. Meanwhile, the dogs and Bengal tiger can't consent. False slippery slope is false.

I don't even understand the objection to polygamy As long as everyone is of age and capable of consenting

Those are words taken directly from the tea party nut's rant.

The arguments I usually hear about polygamy is how people are coerced into it and how it has been abused to force underaged girls into sexual relationships with older men.

Can't you say the same thing about monogamous heterosexual marriages?

But why is gay marriage even an issue? You can't legislate the gay away. A marriage certificate from the state is just a goddammed piece of paper - except for the legal consequences. If one believes in god they will probably get married in a church. If a church believes that homosexuality is a sin, then they should be free to not host gay marriages. Their "God" won't recognize gay marriages anyway so why is this even important?

I don't even understand the objection to polygamy As long as everyone is of age and capable of consenting

Those are words taken directly from the tea party nut's rant.

The arguments I usually hear about polygamy is how people are coerced into it and how it has been abused to force underaged girls into sexual relationships with older men.

Can't you say the same thing about monogamous heterosexual marriages?

But why is gay marriage even an issue? You can't legislate the gay away. A marriage certificate from the state is just a goddammed piece of paper - except for the legal consequences. If one believes in god they will probably get married in a church. If a church believes that homosexuality is a sin, then they should be free to not host gay marriages. Their "God" won't recognize gay marriages anyway so why is this even important?

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

FTFA: The traditional family, and the left hates that expression, is the most stable unit in America

"Free market" capitalism is probably the greatest threat American family units of all kinds have ever faced. If I can hire and fire at will all the components that marriage brings: sex, food, shelter, companionship---why should anyone get or stay married through all the inconvenient hard parts?

"Things are never as they really are."-Actually, that is the definition of reality.

"Now the far left wants to turn marriage into a freak show involving 3 men, 5 women, 2 dogs and a Bengal tiger. "-I know that the Right is filled with repressed perverts, but this is too far. The liberals need to rise up and prevent the tea party from marrying dogs and tigers.

"The truth is, we implemented the programs the left wanted and this is the result."-UM. NO. Pretty certain that the RIGHT was behind the criminalization of drugs and putting all the black men into prison.

"Traditionally marriage has worked well in America for centuries. "- So they plan on banning divorce right? Right?? DOMA included banning all divorces, right?? Because the BEST way to protect marriage, would be to ban divorce.

I really dont understand these teahadists. Other than repressed balls of hate.When are they going to ban the catholics, jews, muslims and mormons??

PC LOAD LETTER:Polygamy is still separately illegal and has mainly Mormon right-wingers (and few hippie commune crappers) pushing to get it legalized. Meanwhile, the dogs and Bengal tiger can't consent. False slippery slope is false.

But it is legal for muslims to marry multiple women, right? Freedom of religion bans the US from prohibiting most, if not all religious rights. How would a US ban on multiple muslim wives NOT be unconstitutional???

LOLWould be funny if muslims led the way to fix the retarded marriage crap in the US.

1) no deductions for children2) no extra tax benefits for being married

"The State's interests in support of marriage would be undermined if marriage were so malleable in meaning as to include any consensual relationship claimed to be 'exclusive and permanent.' ... Marriage redefined to mean any 'permanent' intimate personal relationship between two consenting persons has no firmer basis than a similar relationship between three or more persons, which has been long rejected." ~ Washington Supreme Court, Andersen v. King County 138 P.3d 963 (2006)

SkinnyHead:"The State's interests in support of marriage would be undermined if marriage were so malleable in meaning as to include any consensual relationship claimed to be 'exclusive and permanent.' ... Marriage redefined to mean any 'permanent' intimate personal relationship between two consenting persons has no firmer basis than a similar relationship between three or more persons, which has been long rejected." ~ Washington Supreme Court, Andersen v. King County 138 P.3d 963 (2006)

SkinnyHead:"The State's interests in support of marriage would be undermined if marriage were so malleable in meaning as to include any consensual relationship claimed to be 'exclusive and permanent.' ... Marriage redefined to mean any 'permanent' intimate personal relationship between two consenting persons has no firmer basis than a similar relationship between three or more persons, which has been long rejected." ~ Washington Supreme Court, Andersen v. King County 138 P.3d 963 (2006)

sno man:SkinnyHead: "The State's interests in support of marriage would be undermined if marriage were so malleable in meaning as to include any consensual relationship claimed to be 'exclusive and permanent.' ... Marriage redefined to mean any 'permanent' intimate personal relationship between two consenting persons has no firmer basis than a similar relationship between three or more persons, which has been long rejected." ~ Washington Supreme Court, Andersen v. King County 138 P.3d 963 (2006)

Traditionally marriage Slavery has worked well in America for centuries. It has always been one man slave and one woman owner. Those who want to change this bear the burden of showing why this would be good for the nation. So far they have not.

As long as all the involved parties are of legal age and have the ability and desire to consent I do not care what they do. So if 3 men 5 women 2 dogs and a Bengal tiger want to marry and the dogs and tiger have in some way through science or magic gained the required abilities then they can have at if or all I care.